Axillo-femoral bypass and simultaneous removal of the aorto-femoral vascular infection site: is the procedure safe?

In a retrospective analysis 12 patients treated for aorto-femoral vascular infections between 1984 and 1990 were evaluated. They were all male with a mean age of 63 years. Indications for treatment were: mycotic aneurysms-3, primary aorto-enteric fistula-2 and graft infection-7. Surgical treatment consisted of implantation of an extra-anatomic bypass, carefully avoiding the infected area, followed by removal of the infected graft and tissue at the same session. There was no early mortality (less than 30 days) but the first year mortality was 42% (n = 5). Causes of death were: aortic stump disruption (n = 1), recurrence of aorto-enteric fistula (n = 2), axillary anastomosis disruption (n = 1), cardiac failure (n = 1). Orthotopic reconstruction of the aorta after 12 months, as we advocate, was accomplished in two patients and is scheduled in another one. In two patients their poor condition precluded this second step, and in two further patients above-knee amputation with subsequent extra-anatomic graft removal was needed. Only one of the 12 extra-anatomic bypasses became infected. Reconstruction by axillo-femoral bypass combined with removal of the aorto-femoral graft at the same session is a practicable procedure with good early results. However, the rate of successful orthotopic reconstruction of the aorta after 12 months is low because of a high mortality rate, especially in the presence of aorto-enteric fistulas, and because some patients with well functioning axillo-femoral grafts are in too poor condition for another large operation.     

Total excision and extra-anatomic bypass for aortic graft infection

Reports of high mortality and amputation rates following total excision and extra-anatomic bypass for aortic graft infection have prompted the use of alternate approaches including local antibiotics, partial resection, in situ revascularization, and graft excision without revascularization. Experience with aortic graft infection was reviewed to establish current morbidity and mortality rates and evaluate our bias in favor of total excision and extra-anatomic bypass. Aortic graft infection was identified in 32 patients, 8 with aortoenteric fistulas. The mean interval between graft placement and infection was 34 months. History of groin exposure (75%) or multiple prior vascular surgery (50%) was common. Clinical signs included fever and/or leukocytosis (23 patients), false aneurysm (9 patients), graft thrombosis (6 patients), groin infection (11 patients), and gastrointestinal hemorrhage (6 patients). Microbiologic data, available in 26 patients, demonstrated gram-positive organisms in 15 patients and gram-negative in 9. Multiple organisms were seen in 11 patients. Patients were treated by partial removal with (8 patients) or without (4 patients) revascularization or total removal with (18 patients) or without (2 patients) revascularization. Revascularization was by an extra-anatomic route, either simultaneous or staged. Overall morbidity/mortality was less in the revascularized groups (p = 0.01), while late complications were seen only after partial removal (p less than 0.01). The best results were found after total excision with revascularization. No patient in this group experienced late infection or amputation during a mean follow-up of 34 months (range: 1 to 168 months). Complications after total excision and extra-anatomic bypass for aortic graft infection are lower than generally appreciated. This approach should remain the standard to which other approaches are compared.     

Early and long-term results of conventional surgical treatment of secondary aorto-enteric fistula.

OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively evaluate early and late results of surgical treatment of secondary aorto-enteric fistulas (SAEFs) with prosthetic excision and extra-anatomic bypass (conventional treatment) in a single centre institution (teaching hospital). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 1990 and March 2002, 30 patients underwent conventional surgical treatment for SAEF. Data concerning these operations were collected in a dedicate database and 30-day mortality, patency and limb salvage rates were evaluated by mean of chi-square test and logistic regression analysis. Clinical and ultrasonographic follow-up was performed; late results were evaluated by mean of Kaplan-Meyer curves. RESULTS: Thirty day mortality rate was 26% (8 patients). Timing and sequence of interventions (simultaneous or staged, prosthetic excision or revascularization before) had no significative influence on perioperative mortality. There were six extranatomic bypass thromboses at 30 days, but no amputation. Mean duration of follow-up was 24 months; estimated 12- and 24-month survival rates were 60 and 50%, respectively. There were better results in terms of long-term survival in patients undergone prosthetic graft excision before. Primary patency rate was 62% and limb salvage rate was 95%, both at 24 months. Two prosthetic graft reinfections occurred during follow-up (9%). Cumulative reinterventions rate during follow-up was 18%. CONCLUSIONS: Conventional surgical treatment of SAEF permitted, in our experience, satisfactory early and long terms results, with fair rates of patency and limb salvage. Surgical timing and sequence do not seem to affect early results.     

Improving survival and limb salvage in patients with aortic graft infection

A 15-year experience with 38 aortic graft infections, including 15 patients with graft enteric fistulas, is reviewed in order to analyze modern-day surgical results utilizing extra-anatomic bypass and aortic graft excision. Perioperative mortality was 14% during the most recent 7-year interval, which was a notable improvement compared with the earlier time interval (p = 0.06). Extended follow-up of the perioperative survivors demonstrated a 77% cumulative 5-year survival and a 76% cumulative 5-year limb salvage rate. Subsequent axillofemoral graft infection occurred in 22% of survivors and resulted in a significantly higher amputation rate compared with those patients with no axillofemoral graft infection (p less than 0.001). The results suggest good perioperative and long-term survival in patients with aortic graft infection, with excellent limb salvage if subsequent axillofemoral graft infection can be avoided.     

Long-term results following surgical management of aortic graft infection

Between January 1970 and June 1988, a total of 45 patients with aortic prosthetic graft infection underwent removal of the infected aortic prosthesis. In addition, 36 of these patients also underwent revascularization via an extra-anatomic bypass. We analyzed the early and long-term results with respect to survival, limb salvage, freedom from infection, and extra-anatomic graft patency. The 30-day mortality was 24% (11/45), and the amputation rate was 11% (8/73). During a mean follow-up of 36 months (range, 2 to 144 months), 80% (24/30) of the patients remained free of infection and are considered cured. Infection in the extra-anatomic bypass graft was the most common cause of recurrent sepsis and the leading cause of late amputations (four of seven). By life-table methods, 1-year survival was 63% and 5-year survival was 49%. Limb salvage rates at 1 and 5 years were 79% and 66%, respectively. The primary patency rate of extra-anatomic bypass was 43% at 3 years, with the secondary patency rate improved to 65%. These early and late results are in marked contrast to the natural history of untreated aortic graft infection. Nonetheless, a perioperative mortality rate of 24%, a 5-year limb loss rate of 33%, and 3-year graft thrombosis rate of 35% are testimony to the serious nature of aortic graft infection and the need to develop better methods to prevent this complication.     

Long-term outcome after treatment of aortic graft infection with staged extra-anatomic bypass grafting and aortic graft removal

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine long-term outcome in patients with infected prosthetic aortic grafts who were treated with extra-anatomic bypass grafting and aortic graft removal. METHODS: Between January 1989 and July 1999, 36 patients were treated for aortic graft infection with extra-anatomic bypass grafting and aortic graft removal. Extra-anatomic bypass graft types were axillofemoral femoral (5), axillofemoral (26; bilateral in 20), axillopopliteal (3; bilateral in 1) and axillofemoral/axillopopliteal (2). The mean follow-up was 32.3 +/- 4. 8 months. RESULTS: Four patients (11%) died in the postoperative period, and two patients died during follow-up as a direct consequence of extra-anatomic bypass grafting and aortic graft removal (one died 7 months after extra-anatomic bypass graft failure, one died 36 months after aortic stump disruption). One additional patient died 72 months after failure of a subsequent aortic reconstruction, so that the overall treatment-related mortality was 19%, whereas overall survival by means of life table analysis was 56% at 5 years. No amputations were required in the postoperative period, but four patients (11%) required amputation during follow-up. Twelve patients (35%) had extra-anatomic bypass graft failure during follow-up, and six patients underwent secondary aortic reconstruction (thoracobifemoral [2], iliofemoral [2], femorofemoral [2]). However, with the exclusion of patients undergoing axillopopliteal grafts (primary patency 0% at 7 months), only seven patients (25%) had extra-anatomic bypass graft failure, and only two patients required amputation (one after extra-anatomic bypass graft removal for infection, one after failure of a secondary aortic reconstruction). Furthermore, primary and secondary patency rates by means of life table analysis were 75% and 100% at 41 months for axillofemoral femoral grafts and 64% and 100% at 60 months for axillofemoral grafts. Only one patient required extra-anatomic bypass graft removal for recurrent infection, and only one late aortic stump disruption occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Staged extra-anatomic bypass grafting (with axillofemoral bypass graft) and aortic graft removal for treatment of aortic graft infection are associated with acceptable early and long-term outcomes and should remain a primary approach in selected patients with this grave problem.     

Aortic graft infections: replacement with autogenous vein

The purpose of this review article is to summarize our published experience with the use of the superficial femoral-popliteal vein (SFPV) to replace infected aortic prostheses. The SFPV has proven to be resistant to infections of all types and has shown no signs of degeneration over the long term. Since SFPV bypass and prosthetic graft excision are performed as a single stage, operative times are extensive. Therefore, it may not be appropriate for the sickest patients with severe medical comorbidities. Nevertheless, the operation has been associated with gratifyingly low mortality and amputation rates that are far better than published rates associated with graft excision and extra-anatomic bypass. It is particularly suited to patients with complex aortofemoral graft reconstructions who cannot undergo extra-anatomic revascularization for technical reasons. The venous sequella of SFPV harvest are minimal. These data and those from three other centers support the conclusion that graft excision and replacement with SFPV is an excellent alternative for treatment of aortic graft infections.     

The management of aortoenteric and paraprosthetic fistulae

Aortoenteric and aortic paraprosthetic fistulae are devastating complications. Most authors recommend total excision of the graft and revascularization of the lower extremities by extra-anatomic bypass. We reviewed the University of Pittsburgh experience with these fistulae in 15 patients between 1977 and 1987. There were 9 aortoenteric fistulae (AEF) and 6 paraprosthetic fistulae (PPF). Seven of the 9 AEF had no abscess surrounding the graft, but communication of the intestine with the aortic anastomosis. One patient died during operation. Six patients underwent a local repair or in situ replacement of the graft. All 6 of those patients survived operation without limb loss. Two of the 9 patients with AEF had evidence of graft infection and underwent total excision of the graft and extra-anatomic reconstruction. Both patients died, one of sepsis and one of aortic stump rupture. All 6 patients with PPF had clinical and operative evidence of overt graft infection and underwent total graft excision and extra-anatomic bypass. Two of these patients died secondary to sepsis. We conclude that AEF, without evidence of graft infection, were safely treated by local repair. Patients with PPF had infected grafts requiring graft removal with significant morbidity and mortality.     

Priority of revascularization in patients with graft enteric fistulas, infected arteries, or infected arterial prostheses.

Patients with arterial infections, infected arterial prostheses, or graft enteric erosions or fistulas have high amputation and mortality rates after treatment. An unresolved therapeutic question is whether remote ("extra-anatomic") bypass should precede or follow removal of the infected artery or prosthesis. None of the ten patients reported here who had a remote bypass inserted first developed distal limb ischemia or infection of the remote bypass. Literature review of patients with aortic prosthetic infections revealed a mortality of 71% (10/14) if infected graft removal preceded remote bypass and 26% (6/23) if remote bypass was first. Patients with graft enteric erosions or fistulas had a mortality of 53% (40/75) if graft removal was first and 17% (5/29) if remote bypass was first. Subsequent infection of the remote bypass was rare. Therefore, when possible, remote bypass with a prosthetic graft should precede removal of an infected artery, an infected arterial prosthesis, a graft enteric erosion, or a graft enteric fistula.     

Long-term results of cryopreserved arterial allograft reconstruction in infected prosthetic grafts and mycotic aneurysms of the abdominal aorta.

PURPOSE: This prospective, observational study determined the long-term outcome in patients with abdominal aortic infection (primary or prosthetic graft) who were treated with simultaneous aortic/graft excision and cryopreserved arterial allograft reconstruction. METHODS: From April 1992 to March 2000, patients with abdominal aortic infection underwent complete or partial excision of the infected aorta/prosthetic graft and cryopreserved arterial allograft reconstruction. Arterial allografts were harvested from multiple organ donors and cryopreserved at -80 degrees C without rate-controlled freezing. The patients were observed for survival, limb salvage, persistence and/or recurrence of infection, and allograft patency. The results were calculated with life-table methods. RESULTS: During the 8-year study period, 28 consecutive patients (27 men, 1 woman; mean age, 64 years) underwent treatment for abdominal aortic infection (23 graft infections, including 7 graft-enteric fistulas and 5 primary aortic infections). Allograft reconstruction was performed as an emergency procedure in 13 patients (46%). The mean follow-up period was 35.4 months (range, 6-101 months). The overall treatment-related mortality rate was 17.8% (17% for graft infection, 20% for primary aortic infection). The overall 3-year survival was 67%. There was no early or late amputation. There was no persistent or recurrent infection, and none of the patients received long-term (> 3 months) antibiotic therapy. Reoperation for allograft revision, excision, or replacement was necessary in four patients (17%) who were available for examination, with no reoperative perioperative death. The 3-year primary and secondary allograft patency rates were 81% and 96%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our experience with cryopreserved arterial allograft in the management of abdominal aortic infection suggests that this technique seems to be a useful option for treating one of the most dreaded vascular complications.     

Influence of Patient Characteristics and Treatment Options on Outcome of Patients with Prosthetic Aortic Graft Infection

This study was undertaken to determine the influence of patient characteristics and treatment options on survival and limb loss after treatment of prosthetic aortic graft infection. Fifty-three patients treated for prosthetic aortic graft infection were reviewed. Twenty-three presented with groin infection, 12 with sepsis, 10 with aortoenteric fistula, 4 with limb ischemia, and 4 with pseudoaneurysm. Treatment included staged extraanatomic bypass (EAB) plus graft excision in 23 patients, simultaneous EAB and graft excision in 18, in situ graft replacement in 5, and local therapy only in 7. Axillofemoral bypass was done for revascularization in 53 limbs and axillopopliteal bypass in 16 limbs. The results of this study showed that morbidity and mortality of prosthetic aortic graft infection is influenced by the presentation and type of treatment of the infected graft. Staged axillofemoral bypass (when possible) plus graft excision appears to be associated with acceptable outcome (survival with limb salvage in 74%).     

In-situ replacement and extra-anatomic bypass for the treatment of infected abdominal aortic grafts

We reviewed the surgical results of 21 patients who had infected abdominal aortic grafts to determine the efficacy of in-situ graft replacement and extra-anatomic bypass in the management of these patients. Twelve patients had a primary perigraft infection, and nine had an infection secondary to an aortoenteric fistula (AEF). Whereas the infected graft was replaced with a new aortic prosthesis in 18 patients, an axillobifemoral bypass operation followed graft excision in three patients. Twelve of the graft replacement patients (two AEF patients) had a low-grade infection, with negative perigraft and blood cultures. All 12 patients were alive at a mean follow-up of 8 years. Two had required above-knee amputation because of severe occlusive disease, and one had required an axillobifemoral bypass because of reinfection. The remaining six graft replacement patients (five AEF patients) had severe graft infections, with positive perigraft fluid and blood cultures in which one or more bacteria were present. Five died of sepsis within 1 month of operation. The remaining patient, who later required an axillobifemoral bypass because of reinfection, was alive at follow-up 4.3 years after operation. The three patients (two AEF patients) who had axillobifemoral bypasses had severe graft infections, with positive perigraft fluid and blood cultures. They survived the extra-anatomic bypass operation and were alive at a mean follow-up of 4.5 years. We conclude that patients who have a low-grade graft infection and negative blood and perigraft cultures can be treated safely by graft excision and in-situ replacement with a new prosthesis.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Infected femoral pseudoaneurysm in intravenous drug abusers.

The result of surgical treatment of 21 infected femoral pseudoaneurysms in 19 intravenous drug addicts was evaluated. Eight pseudoaneurysms involved only the common or superficial femoral artery and 13 involved the femoral bifurcation. Excision and ligation was performed as the sole procedure in 19 instances, and revascularization by bypass through the obturator route was carried out in two. The mean follow-up was 12.3 months. One patient required an above-knee amputation. The resultant ischaemia was greater after triple vessel ligation (mean ankle:brachial pressure index (ABPI) 0.41) than single vessel ligation (mean ABPI 0.58). Postoperative bleeding occurred in one patient. Intermittent claudication was present in 14 patients after excision and ligation. Claudication was universal and more severe after triple than after single vessel ligation. There was no subsequent limb loss. Excision and ligation is safe and is the treatment of choice for infected femoral pseudoaneurysm in drug addicts.     

Intra-abdominal aortic graft infection: complete or partial graft preservation in patients at very high risk

BACKGROUND: Total graft excision with in situ or extra-anatomic revascularization is considered mandatory to treat infection involving the body of aortic grafts. We present a series of nine patients with this complication and such severe comorbid medical illnesses or markedly hostile abdomens that traditional treatments were precluded. In these patients selective complete or partial graft preservation was used. METHODS: Over the past 20 years we have treated nine infected infrarenal aortic prosthetic grafts with complete or partial graft preservation, because excision of the graft body was not feasible. In all nine patients infection of the main body of the aortic graft was documented at computed tomography or surgery. Essential adjuncts included percutaneous or operative drain placement into retroperitoneal abscess cavities and along the graft, with instillation of antibiotics three times daily, repeated debridement of infected groin wounds, and intravenous antibiotic therapy for at least 6 weeks. RESULTS: One patient with purulent groin drainage treated with complete graft preservation died of sepsis. One patient with groin infection treated with complete graft preservation initially did well, but ultimately required total graft excision 5 months later, after clinical improvement. In four patients complete graft preservation was successful; two patients required excision of an occluded infected limb of the graft; and one patient underwent subtotal graft excision, leaving a graft remnant on the aorta, and axillopopliteal bypass. In summary, seven of nine patients survived hospitalization after complete or partial graft preservation; amputation was avoided in all but one patient; and no recurrent infection developed over mean follow-up of 7.6 years (range, 2-15 years). CONCLUSIONS: Although contrary to conventional concepts, partial or complete graft preservation combined with aggressive drainage and groin wound debridement is an acceptable option for treatment of infection involving an entire aortic graft in selected patients with prohibitive risks for total graft excision. This treatment may be compatible with long-term survival and protracted absence of signs or symptoms of infection.     

The results of in situ prosthetic replacement for infected aortic grafts.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of aortic graft infection with graft excision and axillofemoral bypass may carry an increased risk of limb loss, aortic stump blowout, and pelvic ischemia. A review of patients with aortic graft infection treated with in situ prosthetic graft replacement was undertaken to determine if mortality, limb loss, and reinfection rates were improved with this technique. METHODS: The clinical data of 25 patients, 19 males and 6 females, with a mean age of 68 years (range 35 to 83), with aortic graft infection, treated between January 1, 1989, and December 31, 1998, by in situ prosthetic graft replacement were reviewed. Follow-up was complete in the 23 surviving patients and averaged 36 months (range 4 to 103). RESULTS: Twenty aortofemoral, 3 aortoiliac, and 2 straight aortic graft infections were treated with excision and in situ replacement with standard polyester grafts in 16 patients (64%), or with rifampin-soaked collagen or gelatin-impregnated polyester grafts in 9 patients (36%). Fifteen patients (60%) had aortic graft enteric fistulas, 8 patients (32%) had abscesses or draining sinuses, and 2 patients (8%) had bacterial biofilm infections. Thirty-day mortality was 8% (2 of 25). There were no early graft occlusions or amputations. There was one late graft occlusion. There were no late amputations. The reinfection rate was 22% (5 grafts). All reinfections occurred in patients operated upon for occlusive disease. Only one reinfection occurred in the rifampin-soaked graft group (11% versus 29%, P = NS). Reinfection tended to be lower in patients with aortoenteric fistulas and without abscess. Autogenous tissue coverage provided statistically significant protection against reinfection. There were no late deaths related to in situ graft infection. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with in situ graft replacement had an 8% mortality and 100% limb salvage rate. Reinfection rates were similar to those of extra-anatomic bypass, but a trend of lower reinfection rates with rifampin-impregnated grafts was apparent. Patients with aortoenteric fistula and without abscess appear to be well treated by the technique of in situ prosthetic grafting and autogenous tissue coverage.     

Management of aortic graft infection

BACKGROUND: The optimal method of operative treatment of prosthetic aortic graft infection (PAGI) has been the subject of debate; incidence rates of PAGI are low. Diagnosis of PAGI can be difficult. The aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate our results in treating PAGI in order to try and optimize the treatment of this grave problem. METHODS: Thirty-eight patients (median age 68.5 years) were treated for PAGI between 1991 and 2000. Management of PAGI was performed with total graft excision and simultaneous extra-anatomic bypass (n=18), total graft excision and in situ repair with a Rifampicin-soaked gelatin-impregnated prosthetic aortic graft (n=8), or a partial excision with in situ repair (n=11). In 1 patient, only local irrigation was performed. The median follow-up was 45 months. RESULTS: Clinical presentation of PAGI (median interval 3 years) was: discomfort/pain (n=14), gastro-intestinal bleeding (n=11), persisting fever (n=8), or a non-healing wound (n=5). The primary patency rate in patients with extra-anatomic bypass was 67% at 6 months follow-up. In patients with other surgical reconstructions no graft occlusion was encountered. Overall amputation rate was 5%. Recurrent infection of the graft was 15%. The overall early mortality rate in this study was 21%. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis of PAGI is difficult and should be based on a combination of clinical symptoms, laboratory findings and imaging techniques. There are several treatment options that should be tailored to the extent of infection and the patients' physical condition. In a selected group of patients partial excision of the infected graft only can be justified.     

Experience with cryopreserved arterial allografts in the treatment of prosthetic graft infections

The authors present a retrospective study on 30 patients with prosthetic graft infection. Included are 25 patients with aortic graft infection, three with infection of a femorodistal bypass and two with infected axillofemoral grafts. There were 23 isolated primary prosthetic graft infections and seven aorto-enteric fistulas. Treatment consisted of graft excision and replacement with cryopreserved arterial homografts, harvested from brain-death multi-organ donors. The in situ technique was used in 27 cases. Eight patients died postoperatively and two deaths were from allograft related complications. The operative mortality rate was 11% for isolated aortic graft sepsis and the early limb salvage rate was 100%. Persistent or recurrent infection was noted in two cases. The mean follow-up of the series was 24.5 months and occlusive complications occurred in five patients (23%), which resulted in two major amputations. Serial CT scans showed abnormalities in six of the 22 survivors, all of them related to the aortic segment of the allograft. It is concluded that in situ reconstruction with cryopreserved arterial allografts represents an acceptable alternative, especially in the treatment of isolated aortic graft sepsis. Continued follow-up towards late deterioration and/or occlusive complications remains mandatory.     

Improved management of aortic graft infection: the influence of operation sequence and staging

To investigate the influence of operation sequence and staging on the outcome of aortic graft infection, we studied the mortality and amputation rates and incidence of new graft infection involving the extra-anatomic bypass (EAB) among 101 patients treated for secondary aortoenteric fistula (N = 43) or primary perigraft infection (N = 58). Patients were retrospectively grouped according to the operative treatment technique. Seven patients underwent infected graft removal (IGR) followed immediately by EAB (traditional). Fifty-seven patients were revascularized first, followed by immediate IGR in 38 patients (sequential) or by delayed IGR in 19 patients (staged). The median interoperative interval for the staged group was 5 days (range 2 to 31 days). Twenty patients underwent simultaneous IGR and in-line autogenous reconstruction (synchronous) and finally in 15 patients treatment consisted of IGR only with no extremity revascularization (none). The mean follow-up interval for all patients was 36.8 months. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality rate (traditional, 43%; sequential, 24%; and staged, 26%) or incidence of new graft infection (traditional, 43%; sequential, 18%; or staged, 16%) among those patients treated with EAB, although there was a trend toward an improved outcome with either sequential or staged treatment. There was a significantly lower amputation rate among sequential patients (11%) (p = 0.038) but not staged patients (16%) (p = 0.171) when compared with traditional treatment (43%). Staged operative treatment was associated with significantly less physiologic stress than sequential treatment as reflected by multiple perioperative metabolic variables (95% confidence limits). The treatment groups were comparable in the incidence of aortoenteric fistulas, culture-negative infections, emergent procedures, and appropriate antibiotic use. We conclude that reversed sequence or staged operative treatment of infected aortic grafts can be performed with no increased patient risk. Although traditional or sequential treatment may be required in the setting of acute hemorrhage, the staged operative approach is recommended for the treatment of chronic aortic graft infections.     

Vacuum-assisted closure therapy with omental transposition for salvage of infected prosthetic femoral-distal bypass involving the femoral anastomosis

Vascular graft infections are associated with the potential for devastating sequelae, including hemorrhage, septicemia, amputation, and death. Graft excision and debridement of the infected bed with revascularization via an extra-anatomic site or orthotopic vein bypass has been the traditional treatment of choice. Because the morbidity of these operations is substantial, less radical graft preservation techniques are desirable, such as myoplasty, omental flap transposition, and vacuum-assisted closure therapy. We report a patient with infection involving a prosthetic graft that was treated with vacuum-assisted closure and transposition of an omental tongue to enable coverage of the exposed graft.     

Infected femoral artery pseudoaneurysm in drug addicts: the beneficial use of the internal iliac artery for arterial reconstruction

BACKGROUND: Infected femoral artery pseudoaneurysm (IFAP) is a severe complication in parenteral drug abusers, with difficult and controversial management. Ligation alone without revascularization is frequently associated with later intermittent claudication and limb amputation. Furthermore, arterial reconstruction with a synthetic or venous conduit is limited because of a contaminated field and, often, unavailability of autologous venous grafts. In this study, we present our experience with the internal iliac artery (IIA) as a graft for arterial reconstruction after IFAP excision in these patients. METHODS: Data of 14 consecutive patients who presented with IFAP secondary to parenteral drug abuse from 2001 to 2005 were analyzed. Twelve patients (85.7%) were male. The median age was 27 years (range, 19-42 years). In 13 cases, the IFAP involved the common femoral artery, and in 1 case it involved the profunda femoris artery (PFA). In nine patients, we used the IIA for arterial reconstruction (five as a patch and four as an interposition graft), whereas in two patients the arterial deficit was repaired with a great saphenous vein patch. In two cases, an extra-anatomic bypass with a synthetic polytetrafluoroethylene graft was performed. In one patient, the pseudoaneurysm involved the PFA and was treated with excision and ligation of the PFA. RESULTS: All nine patients who underwent revascularization with the use of IIA were free of claudication symptoms. None of them experienced any perioperative complications, had signs of reinfection, or required limb amputation during the follow-up period (median, 19 months; range, 4-52 months). Regarding the remaining five patients, one died 25 days after surgery because of multiorgan failure, and one underwent reoperation because of proximal anastomotic rupture of a synthetic graft. The latter patient finally underwent a transmetatarsal amputation. CONCLUSIONS: The use of IIA for arterial reconstruction after IFAP excision in drug abusers is safe and effective. These preliminary results indicate that the implementation of this technique offers many advantages compared with traditional treatment options.